Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stop assuming that this 'system' will turn us around...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JTC
    replied
    Originally posted by oldster View Post
    I'll try to find that, in the meantime here is an interesting take with stats on the evolution of the Bronco running game.

    http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/2...the-denver-rus

    Here's the closest I've found on game by game.

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/den/2008.htm

    While it is only one of many contributors look at the turnovers in the games we lost.
    Those are some interesting stats in the first article. Stats wise, the Broncos had their best running game for the last 3 years last year.

    Breaking it down by half seasons as per the previous post that suggested the Broncos caught the league by surprise with their pass happy offence.

    The stats do not say the # of attempts.

    Rushing yards for the first half - 842 yards - 105 yards per game
    Passing yards for the first half - 2150 yards- 269 yards per game
    Total yards for the first half - 2992 yards- 374 yards per game
    Record – 4 and 4

    Rushing yards for the second half – 1020 yards - 127 yards per game
    Passing yards for the second half – 2321 yards - 290 yards per game
    Total yards for the second half - 3341 yards - 417 yards per game
    Record – 4 and 4

    I added these up with a calculator, so mistakes are possible.

    Also, they had 30 turnovers. I’ve got Jay with 18 interceptions and 2 fumbles lost for a total of 20 of the 30.

    Leave a comment:


  • oldster
    replied
    Originally posted by JTC View Post
    So, you are saying that Cutler’s numbers were inflated during the first half of the season because teams were playing them honest and the running game produced the vast amount of their rushing yardage during the second half of the year. Does anyone have a link to the game by game stats so we may see the exact percentages of the changes?
    I'll try to find that, in the meantime here is an interesting take with stats on the evolution of the Bronco running game.

    http://www.milehighreport.com/2009/2...the-denver-rus

    Here's the closest I've found on game by game.

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/den/2008.htm

    While it is only one of many contributors look at the turnovers in the games we lost.
    Last edited by oldster; 04-16-2009, 10:53 PM. Reason: Addition

    Leave a comment:


  • JTC
    replied
    Originally posted by knoxman36and2 View Post
    We caught the league by surprise in the first few games by coming out throwing the ball much more than in the past. Instead of a balanced attack, we wound up heavily favoring the passing attack and neglecting the rushing attack.

    By the time the 1st 3 games had been played? Any team facing the Broncos knew we weren't running the ball as we had in years past. By midway through the season, teams were actively gameplanning to stop our passing attack, and largely ignoring our rushing.

    The emphasis for any defense facing us was to stop the pass and limit its effectiveness. We often got good yardage in the rushing attack simply because none of our opponents were keeping an extra man in the box to defend the run. Their safeties were too busy doubling up on our wideouts or giving over coverage on our tight ends. "IF" we had been as effective in the rushing attack as we had been in the past? You would have seen yardage being contested much more fiercely and extra personnel being brought up close to the line of scrimmage to counter it.

    I personally believe that our opponents knew we didn't have a stellar RB that they needed to fear, when it came to breaking off the big run or scoring long yardage TD's. Our rushing attack was the most dominant when Hillis was running the ball and plowing through tackles. His longest runs were less than 20 yards though and even though he consistently got us 3-5 yards per carry there was no homerun threat. You have to account for what opposing defenses were preparing for and how they played the run or pass when facing us to get an accurate idea of why our stats looked the way they did in our rushing game.
    So, you are saying that Cutler’s numbers were inflated during the first half of the season because teams were playing them honest and the running game produced the vast amount of their rushing yardage during the second half of the year. Does anyone have a link to the game by game stats so we may see the exact percentages of the changes?

    Leave a comment:


  • JTC
    replied
    Originally posted by AC1 View Post
    If we hadn't lost 8 RBs to IR, the point in bold might have been valid.

    Also, are you trying to suggest that a coach who, apart from Bobby Turner, is the only common factor in 14 years of superior running game, loses his judgment and understanding of the running game for exactly one season?

    My point was that when your team ranks 28th in rushing attempts, it indicates that the head coach does not trust the running game much. I never said that Shanahan didn't trust his system. You made that assumption. The lack of faith in his running game for exactly one season also co-incided with 8 RBs going on IR. I'd say the reason for the lack of faith is obvious.
    It seems odd that a coach can lose his faith in the running game when they were 2nd in yards per attempt in the league. Only the Giants got more production out of their running game (yards wise) for the amount of utilization than did the Broncos. And where did I say that the coach had lost faith in his system? (whatever that is)

    Leave a comment:


  • oldster
    replied
    Originally posted by AC1 View Post
    We ranked 9th, 19th and 28th in rushing attempts in 2006, 2007, and 2008 respectively.

    The drop from 9th to 19th is easily explained by the declining defense. When your defense is poor, you have to pass more. Defenses as bad as ours - Detroit, Miami, Atlanta ranked 32nd, 27th and 29th respectively. This would suggest that Shanahan trusted the running game more than other teams did in 2007.

    It also shows that he trusted the running game more in 2007 than in 2008, when we ranked lower in rushing attempts than at any point during Shanahan's tenure in Denver. Not only was it lower, it was lower by a huge quantum (we would normally be in the top 5 in rushing attempts).

    I could agree with your assumptions except our defensive rankings don't jibe with your analysis. Defensive rankings 2005/15th, 2006/14th and 2007/19th. I really don't see that great a difference in defensive efficiency to warrant the reduction in running attempts.
    Last edited by oldster; 04-16-2009, 03:54 PM. Reason: Wrong about 2007

    Leave a comment:


  • knoxman36and2
    replied
    Originally posted by JTC View Post
    So the head coach had little faith in a running game that was 28th in rushing attempts, 12th in total yards and 2nd in yards per attempt? If your 2 choices were the only explanations, I would go with the second option so as not to question the intelligence of the head coach.
    We caught the league by surprise in the first few games by coming out throwing the ball much more than in the past. Instead of a balanced attack, we wound up heavily favoring the passing attack and neglecting the rushing attack.

    By the time the 1st 3 games had been played? Any team facing the Broncos knew we weren't running the ball as we had in years past. By midway through the season, teams were actively gameplanning to stop our passing attack, and largely ignoring our rushing.

    The emphasis for any defense facing us was to stop the pass and limit its effectiveness. We often got good yardage in the rushing attack simply because none of our opponents were keeping an extra man in the box to defend the run. Their safeties were too busy doubling up on our wideouts or giving over coverage on our tight ends. "IF" we had been as effective in the rushing attack as we had been in the past? You would have seen yardage being contested much more fiercely and extra personnel being brought up close to the line of scrimmage to counter it.

    I personally believe that our opponents knew we didn't have a stellar RB that they needed to fear, when it came to breaking off the big run or scoring long yardage TD's. Our rushing attack was the most dominant when Hillis was running the ball and plowing through tackles. His longest runs were less than 20 yards though and even though he consistently got us 3-5 yards per carry there was no homerun threat. You have to account for what opposing defenses were preparing for and how they played the run or pass when facing us to get an accurate idea of why our stats looked the way they did in our rushing game.

    Leave a comment:


  • AC1
    replied
    Originally posted by oldster View Post
    Statistically then Shanahan must not have trusted the running game since 2005 because our running attempts per year have gone down since then. What are your thoughts on that?
    We ranked 9th, 19th and 28th in rushing attempts in 2006, 2007, and 2008 respectively.

    The drop from 9th to 19th is easily explained by the declining defense. When your defense is poor, you have to pass more. Defenses as bad as ours - Detroit, Miami, Atlanta ranked 32nd, 27th and 29th respectively. This would suggest that Shanahan trusted the running game more than other teams did in 2007.

    It also shows that he trusted the running game more in 2007 than in 2008, when we ranked lower in rushing attempts than at any point during Shanahan's tenure in Denver. Not only was it lower, it was lower by a huge quantum (we would normally be in the top 5 in rushing attempts).

    Leave a comment:


  • oldster
    replied
    Originally posted by jhns View Post
    Again, look at your decline. Them declining some is not the same as jumping down to 28th. That is exactly what the other poster was saying. Please though, show us how this was a trend. Show us the decline.
    Plant time........

    Leave a comment:


  • jhns
    replied
    Originally posted by oldster View Post
    OK, one last time then I'm going out to talk to my plants who have better reasoning skills. He stated that Shanahan did not trust the running game thus having fewer attempts putting us 28th. I stated our running attempts per game has shown a declining trend since 2005 thus the trust factor has been ongoing. This was before the 7rb season so you may infer from that anything your fertile little mind can make up.
    Again, look at your decline. Them declining some is not the same as jumping down to 28th. That is exactly what the other poster was saying. Please though, show us how this was a trend. Show us the decline.

    Leave a comment:


  • oldster
    replied
    Originally posted by jhns View Post
    Draw me a picture then. I just read it again. Still says the same thing to me.
    OK, one last time then I'm going out to talk to my plants who have better reasoning skills. He stated that Shanahan did not trust the running game thus having fewer attempts putting us 28th. I stated our running attempts per game has shown a declining trend since 2005 thus the trust factor has been ongoing. This was before the 7rb season so you may infer from that anything your fertile little mind can make up.

    Leave a comment:


  • jhns
    replied
    Originally posted by oldster View Post
    Read the context of his statement, my response and if you have further questions I'll try to draw you a picture.
    Draw me a picture then. I just read it again. Still says the same thing to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • oldster
    replied
    Originally posted by jhns View Post
    Because that is his entire point. Look at how low we ranked on rush attempts. Not the fact that they went down. It is how far down.
    Read the context of his statement, my response and if you have further questions I'll try to draw you a picture.

    Leave a comment:


  • jhns
    replied
    Originally posted by oldster View Post
    What in any way, shape or form does that have to do with my statement?
    Because that is his entire point. Look at how low we ranked on rush attempts. Not the fact that they went down. It is how far down.

    Leave a comment:


  • oldster
    replied
    Originally posted by jhns View Post
    Were they 28th?
    What in any way, shape or form does that have to do with my statement?

    Leave a comment:


  • jhns
    replied
    Originally posted by oldster View Post
    Statistically then Shanahan must not have trusted the running game since 2005 because our running attempts per year have gone down since then. What are your thoughts on that?
    Were they 28th?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X